Objective: To systematically review and perform a meta-analysis on the available evidence for anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) monotherapy versus panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR).
Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis PARTICIPANTS: Randomized clinical trials included participants ≥18 years old with clinical or angiographic evidence of PDR. Interventions included were anti-VEGF monotherapy and PRP. Excluded studies were those with potentially biased treatment allocation and those offering combination therapies.
Methods: The primary outcome was mean change in best-corrected visual acuity. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of patients developing severe (<6/60) or moderate (6/24-6/60) vision loss, rates of vitrectomy or vitreous hemorrhage, worsening macula edema, and reduced visual field indices.
Results: Five studies of varying quality met the inclusion criteria (n = 632). The anti-VEGF intervention arm had a mean difference of -0.08 logMAR or 4 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (EDTRS) letters gained (p = 0.02) when compared with PRP at 12 months. The difference in rates of vitrectomy and vitreous hemorrhage favoured anti-VEGF over PRP (risk difference [RD] -0.10, p = < 0.001 and RD -0.10, p = 0.003 respectively).
Conclusions: This meta-analysis of the available evidence in patients with early PDR demonstrates a potential benefit for anti-VEGF over PRP alone. However, these benefits must be weighed against the relative costs of treatment and the potential risks of loss to follow-up.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2021.01.017 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!